Re: [RFC][Discuss] Increase non-syntax runtime-impacting RFCvotingthreshold to 60%

This is only part of a thread. view whole thread
  100568
September 13, 2017 21:25 cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker")
On 13.09.2017 at 22:42, Sara Golemon wrote:

> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/rfc.voting-threshold > > This topic has come up on the mailing list a few times, so I'd like to > formally open the topic for discussion. > > I'm generally pretty liberal when it comes to allowing the PHP > language to evolve and explore its identity, but the truth is a > feature that has 30 people vote against it and 31 people vote in favor > of it is not a mandate by any stretch of the imagination. It's an > opportunity to examine why a divide exists and if we're all being > honest with each other, improve the original idea before it becomes a > maintenance burden.
Thanks for taking the initiative on this! FTR: Zeev has also started preparing an RFC which includes this voting threshold, besides further issues: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting2017>.
> Please note the "Open Question". I'm not all that sure 60% is enough > of a mandate either, but I wanted to be conservative in my > conservatism. If folks think 2/3 is more appropriate (and consistent > with syntax changes), I'm happy to change this number before we move > to voting phase.
IMHO, a 2/3 majority would be most suitable for any changes to php-src. Most votes have even been clearer, and I believe most (if not all) which would have failed a 2/3 threshold would have failed 60% as well. (Zeev presented more detailed stats on this list a while ago.) Having a 2/3 threshold for all php-src change related votes would at least avoid the discussion into which category the vote falls, though. -- Christoph M. Becker
  100570
September 13, 2017 21:38 zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christoph M. Becker [mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de] > Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 12:25 AM > To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>; PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net> > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Discuss] Increase non-syntax runtime-impacting > RFC votingthreshold to 60% > > On 13.09.2017 at 22:42, Sara Golemon wrote: > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/rfc.voting-threshold > > > > This topic has come up on the mailing list a few times, so I'd like to > > formally open the topic for discussion. > > > > I'm generally pretty liberal when it comes to allowing the PHP > > language to evolve and explore its identity, but the truth is a > > feature that has 30 people vote against it and 31 people vote in favor > > of it is not a mandate by any stretch of the imagination. It's an > > opportunity to examine why a divide exists and if we're all being > > honest with each other, improve the original idea before it becomes a > > maintenance burden. > > Thanks for taking the initiative on this! > > FTR: Zeev has also started preparing an RFC which includes this voting > threshold, besides further issues: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting2017>.
Oh wow, I was hoping to bake it for a while longer before public scrutiny :) Still a lot of work to go on it. Realistically I'm only going to bring it up for discussion sometime around late October because I'm actually going to be off the grid for most of the 2nd half of September and most of October.
> IMHO, a 2/3 majority would be most suitable for any changes to php-src. > Most votes have even been clearer, and I believe most (if not all) which would > have failed a 2/3 threshold would have failed 60% as well. (Zeev presented > more detailed stats on this list a while ago.) Having a 2/3 threshold for all php- > src change related votes would at least avoid the discussion into which category > the vote falls, though.
I agree, and the only exception that may make sense is the addition of functionality under an extension's namespace/pseudo namespace. E.g., I'm not sure we need a 2/3 vote for a new oci8_*() function, or a new method added to ext/mysqli. There are no downwards compatibility considerations, and it seems reasonable enough that the subject matter experts (the extension maintainers) will be given jurisdiction here. To be honest, I'm not sure we need a vote at all for those, 2/3 or otherwise. But this is pretty much the only example I can think of. That said, I do think that if we finally have the mental strength and stamina to tackle the laconic 2011 Voting RFC, we should tackle it more thoroughly and try to solve as many of the issues that came up over the years. This is what I'm attempting to do in the RFC I started drafting a couple of days ago - and that I'm NOT YET PUBLICLY DISCUSSING :) Zeev
  100571
September 13, 2017 22:03 cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker")
On 13.09.2017 at 23:38, Zeev Suraski wrote:

>> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christoph M. Becker [mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de] >> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 12:25 AM >> To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>; PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net> >> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Discuss] Increase non-syntax runtime-impacting >> RFC votingthreshold to 60% >> >> FTR: Zeev has also started preparing an RFC which includes this voting >> threshold, besides further issues: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting2017>. > > Oh wow, I was hoping to bake it for a while longer before public scrutiny :)
If you want to hide changes from <https://wiki.php.net/feed.php>, you have to mark them as "Minor Changes" (right below the "Edit summary"). :) -- Christoph M. Becker
  100572
September 13, 2017 22:08 zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)
On 14 Sep 2017, at 1:03, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de<mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de>> wrote:

On 13.09.2017 at 23:38, Zeev Suraski wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: Christoph M. Becker [mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de]
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 12:25 AM
To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net<mailto:pollita@php.net>>; PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net<mailto:internals@lists.php.net>>
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Discuss] Increase non-syntax runtime-impacting
RFC votingthreshold to 60%

FTR: Zeev has also started preparing an RFC which includes this voting
threshold, besides further issues: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting2017>.

Oh wow, I was hoping to bake it for a while longer before public scrutiny :)

If you want to hide changes from <https://wiki.php.net/feed.php>, you
have to mark them as "Minor Changes" (right below the "Edit summary").

I'm not into hiding, it's not confidential, just wasn't quite ready for the spotlight just yet, especially as I won't be around to discuss it for over a month :)

Zeev
  100573
September 13, 2017 22:23 cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker")
On 14.09.2017 at 00:08m, Zeev Suraski wrote:

> On 14 Sep 2017, at 1:03, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de<mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de>> wrote: > > On 13.09.2017 at 23:38, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Christoph M. Becker [mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de] > Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 12:25 AM > To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net<mailto:pollita@php.net>>; PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net<mailto:internals@lists.php.net>> > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Discuss] Increase non-syntax runtime-impacting > RFC votingthreshold to 60% > > FTR: Zeev has also started preparing an RFC which includes this voting > threshold, besides further issues: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting2017>. > > Oh wow, I was hoping to bake it for a while longer before public scrutiny :) > > If you want to hide changes from <https://wiki.php.net/feed.php>, you > have to mark them as "Minor Changes" (right below the "Edit summary"). > > I'm not into hiding, it's not confidential, just wasn't quite ready for the spotlight just yet, especially as I won't be around to discuss it for over a month :)
I didn't want to bring it into the spotlight – I just wanted to avoid having two partially overlapping RFCs going unnoticed by the respective authors. That's also why I've snipped most parts of your previous reply, even though I'd have to say something about it. :) -- Christoph M. Becker